Top RDF namespaces
Tim Finin, 1:00pm 23 September 2007James Simmons posted about PTSW’s namespaces page, which has a complete list of the 388 namespaces they have seen with frequencies of use. We reported on the Swoogle’s list of the 100 most common RDF namespaces last year. There are some interesting differences. I’ve put the top 20 from each list side by side.
It’s interesting to note that there are only eight namespaces that are common to both lists — these are in black. The ones that are unique to a single list are in red.
| PTSW | Swoogle | |
| http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ | http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# | |
| http://blogs.yandex.ru/schema/foaf/ | http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ | |
| http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos# | http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# | |
| http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns# | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ | |
| http://rdfs.org/sioc/types# | http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/ | |
| http://www.geonames.org/ontology# | http://webns.net/mvcb/ | |
| http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl# | http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos# | |
| http://purl.org/vocab/bio/0.1/ | http://purl.org/vocab/bio/0.1/ | |
| http://smw.ontoware.org/2005/smw# | http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/ | |
| http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-… | http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0# | |
| http://purl.org/rss/1.0/ | http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/ | |
| http://www.w3.org/2004/12/q/contentlabel… | http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl# | |
| http://usefulinc.com/ns/doap# | http://web.resource.org/cc/ | |
| http://web.resource.org/cc/ | http://xmlns.com/wot/0.1/ | |
| http://www.daml.org/2001/10/html/airport… | http://purl.org/dc/terms/ | |
| http://www.w3.org/1999/ | http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/ | |
| http://www.icra.org/rdfs/vocabularyv03# | http://www.ecademy.com/namespace/ | |
| http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Special:URIRes… | http://inferenceweb.stanford.edu/2004/07/iw.owl# | |
| http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# | http://www.trustix.net/schema/rdf/spi-0.0.1# | |
| http://purl.org/stuff/rev# | http://xmlns.com/wordnet/1.6/ |
The differences are no doubt due to (1) how the two systems acquire RDF documents, which determines the types of documents in their collections and (2) the fact that these studies were done a year apart. If I get a chance in the next few days, I’ll return the query that produced Swoogle’s “top 100″ list.
Related posts:
Ebiquity Blog
November 30th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Hello
Very nice, I would be interested in the original page of your top 100 rdf namespaces as the link seems to be dead.
Thanks
Julien
July 17th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Very nice, I would be interested in the original page of your top 100 rdf namespaces as the link seems to be dead.